How does access to this work benefit you? Let us know!
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Student Theses John Jay College of Criminal Justice Spring 5-12-2020 Reporting of Sexual Assault and Abuse of Males in the Ultra- Orthodox Jewish Community Yevgeniy Pastukhov Semchenkov CUNY John Jay College, yevgeniy.pastukhovsemchenkov@jjay.cuny.edu How does access to this work benefit you? Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/jj_etds/152 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: AcademicWorks@cuny.edu
Reporting of Sexual Assault and Abuse of Males in the Ultra-Orthodox
Jewish Community
A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Master of Arts in Criminal Justice
John Jay College of Criminal Justice
City University of New York
Yevgeniy Pastukhov Semchenkov
May 2020Reporting of Sexual Assault and Abuse of Males in Ultra-Orthodox Jewish Community
Yevgeniy Pastukhov Semchenkov
This thesis has been presented and accepted by the Criminal Justice Master’s Program,
John Jay College of Criminal Justice of the City University of New York in partial
fulfillment of the requirements of Master of Arts in Criminal Justice.
Karen J. Terry
Thesis Advisor Signature Date
Valerie West
Second Reader Signature Date
Jeff Mellow
Program Director Signature DateAbstract This study explores religious, societal, and intrafamilial factors that prevent Ultra- Orthodox Jewish male survivors of child sexual abuse from reporting the incidents. Five men were recruited and participated in in-depth interviews. The findings indicate that child sexual abuse in Ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities was and is underreported. The factors that were identified as influential on the reporting decisions included religious rules and regulations, lack or deficient sexual and legal education, and communal and intrafamilial efforts to silence a child and cover up the abuse. The results link the religious and educational background of male survivors of sexual abuse and their reporting patterns. Keywords: Child abuse; Reporting; Judaism; Male Victims; Collective Denial; Disclosure
Table of Contents Reporting of Sexual Assault and Abuse of Males in the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish Community .......................................................................................................................1 Literature review ................................................................................................................2 Introduction ....................................................................................................................2 Definition of Sexual Abuse ............................................................................................3 Prevalence of Sexual Abuse in Males ............................................................................5 Age of Victims ...............................................................................................................5 Perpetrators ....................................................................................................................6 Myths Surrounding Sexual Abuse of Males ..................................................................7 Dynamics of Sexual Abuse of Boys ..............................................................................9 Sexual Abuse in Religious Communities.....................................................................12 Ultra-Orthodox Jewish Community .............................................................................13 Sexual Regulations in Judaism ....................................................................................14 Barriers to Reporting Sexual Abuse in Jewish Communities ......................................14 Methodology ....................................................................................................................18 Participants ...................................................................................................................18 Sampling ......................................................................................................................19 Study design .................................................................................................................20 Data Collection ............................................................................................................21 Data Analysis ...............................................................................................................22 Maintaining Trustworthiness of the Analysis ..............................................................24 Results..............................................................................................................................25 Education .....................................................................................................................27 Religion ........................................................................................................................32 Community...................................................................................................................37 Family ..........................................................................................................................42 Individual factors .........................................................................................................44 Discussion and conclusion ...............................................................................................46 References........................................................................................................................55 Appendix..........................................................................................................................67
1
Reporting of Sexual Assault and Abuse of Males in the Ultra-Orthodox
Jewish Community
Sexual abuse of children represents one of the largest concerns for both
mainstream society and the criminal justice system. The recent increase in the disclosure
of sexual assault and abuse of children in religious institutions and communities reveals
the enormous number of incidents. Many of these incidents have occurred in Catholic
schools, churches, synagogues, religious summer camps, Yeshivas, and other places
where children should feel safe and be protected by the authorities, teachers, and clergy
(Spröber et al., 2014).
Despite the increased disclosure in recent years, there is still a dearth of
knowledge about prevalence, mechanics, consequences, reporting issues, treatment of
victims, punishment of abusers, and many other areas related to sexual assault and abuse
of children in religious diasporas. This study aims to fill some gaps in knowledge about
the reporting of sexual assault and abuse of boys in Ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities
in New York City. According to the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence
Survey (NIPSVS), approximately 11.7% of men reported experiencing unwanted sexual
contact in their lifetime (Basil et al., 2011). The same source states that 27.8% of those
who had experienced an unwanted sexual contact, reported that they were victims of
completed rape when they were 10 years old or younger (Basil et al., 2011). Despite its
prevalence, sexual abuse is hugely underreported. Only about 10% of abused males
reported the incident(s) to authorities (Basil et al., 2011; Ullman, 2002; Ullman et al.,
2010). This number is even smaller for the victims of such crimes in religious
communities (Katzenstein & Fontes, 2017). The literature suggests that rates of2
childhood sexual abuse for the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish community are similar to that for
the general population (Yehuda et al., 2007). The main purpose of this study is to
examine religious, societal, and intrafamilial factors that prevent Ultra-Orthodox Jewish
male survivors of sexual assault and abuse from reporting the incident. Following are the
questions that this study attempts to answer:
1. Which factors impact reporting of sexual assault and abuse in Ultra-
Orthodox Jewish communities?
2. If the victim reported the incident, what were the factors that influenced
his decision?
3. If a child’s sexual assault was reported to the parents, how did the parents
handle the incident?
4. How does the community and family members react when a child reports
a sexual assault?
The proposal for this study was submitted to the Human Research Protection
Program and approved by the Institutional Research Board on March 11, 2020. Thus, this
study follows all federal and state rules and regulations and holds the highest ethical
standards.
Literature review
Introduction
For over thirty years social scientists have been working hard to understand the
topic of sexual assault and abuse of males and increase both social and scientific knowledge
about dynamics, prevalence, reporting patterns, and consequences of such incidents. The
existing literature on male survivors of sexual abuse and assault, however, remains scarce.3
The reasons for this scarcity include but are not limited to underreporting, sexism, social
unawareness, stigmatization of victims, predominance of childhood abuse, victims’
inability to recognize the fact that they were sexually abused (Bullock & Beckson, 2011;
Machado et al., 2016; Sable et al., 2006; Walker et al., 2019). It is evident that much more
data and research are needed to better understand victimization of males and issues
associated with male survivors of sexual abuse and assault,
The scarcity of literature can be partially explained by underreporting of the
incidents of sexual victimization by males (Bullock & Beckson, 2011; Hlavka, 2017; Sable
et al., 2006;). In addition, researchers have mostly focused on females as victims of sex
crimes. Coxell and King (2010) support the claim that the scientific community to a certain
extent subscribed to the popular view that sexual victimization of males is rather
improbable, especially if the perpetrator of the assault is a female. They posit that up to
1980 the literature used the pronoun “she” when referred to survivors of sexual abuse.
Hence, there is a dearth of knowledge about the reporting patterns of male victims of sexual
assault and abuse. Also, very little research is done on the reporting patterns of male victims
of sex crimes with religious backgrounds, except for the victims of Catholic clergy (D’alton
et al., 2013; Langeland et al., 2015; Terry, 2015). The least studied groups are those that
are highly secluded and live in accordance with their religious set of rules, such as
Mennonites, Amish, and Ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities.
Definition of Sexual Abuse
While legal terminology and definitions of sexual abuse and assault vary by state,
the online source USLegal.com defines sexual assault as:4
…an assault of a sexual nature on another person. It can include a wide range of
unwanted sexual contact such as rape, forced vaginal, anal or oral penetration,
forced sexual intercourse, inappropriate touching, forced kissing, child molestation,
exhibitionism, voyeurism, obscene phone calls, torture of a victim in a sexual
manner etc. The actor causes submission of the victim by means that is reasonably
calculated to cause submission against the victim's will. (Sexual Assault Law, n.d.)
The American Psychological Association defines it as an “unwanted sexual
activity, with perpetrators using force, making threats or taking advantage of victims not
able to give consent” (Sexual Abuse, n.d.). Terry (2013) divided criminal sexual acts into
four types: (1) sexual acts with contact; (2) noncontact sexual behavior; (3) viewing,
possessing, or producing child pornography; and (4) sexual solicitation or trafficking.
While she was able to categorize illegal sexual behavior, she stated that these four
categories were not mutually exclusive (Terry, 2013). It is evident from definitions that the
key feature of any illegal sexual act is the lack of consent on victims end due to either use
of force, coercion, threats, or due to incapability of the victim to give consent because of
their age, mental or physical condition, or their subordinate position (e.g., children,
prisoners).
The definition of sexual assault and abuse in cases of male victims also varies from
the very specific such as “anal penetration obtained through physical force and perpetrated
by a female partner” (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000) to “behavior carried out with the aim of
making another person engage in sexual activity despite his or her unwillingness to do so”
(Krahe et al., 2003). The differences in definitions impact results of research and lead to
considerable variety in prevalence and dynamics of male victimization. While many5
researchers and legal sources offer a variety of possible definitions of sexual assault and
abuse, the current study uses the definition proposed by the American Psychological
Association. This definition includes wide array of sexual abuse since “sexual activity”
might be anything from fondling to a rape episode. It also incorporates the victims of child
sexual abuse as they cannot give a legal consent.
Prevalence of Sexual Abuse in Males
According to the NIPSVS’s 2011 report, approximately 11.7% of males (an
estimated 13 million men in the United States) reported experiencing various types of
unwanted sexual contact in their lifetime (Basil et al., 2011). A review of recent studies
shows that 3.8% to 22.2% of males experience rape in their lifetime (Tewksbury, 2007).
The 12-month prevalence of unwanted sexual contact reported by men was 2.3% (Basil et
al., 2011). The literature suggests that rates of childhood sexual abuse in religious Jewish
community are similar to that of the secular population (Yehuda et al., 2007). Additionally,
the rates of child sexual abuse are similar for various religious groups when compared to
one another (Doxey et al., 1997; Elliot, 1994; Spröber et al., 2014).
Age of Victims
Finkelhor (1994), states that the peak age of vulnerability for victims of sexual
abuse is between 7 and 13 years. According to NIPSVS, almost 28% of male survivors
reported that they were victims of completed rape when they were 10 years old or younger
(Basil et al., 2011). Additionally, the FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System
(NIBRS) reports that males are more likely to become a victim when they are a juvenile
(18%) than as an adult (4%). The NIBRS also supports the NIPSVS findings that more
than quarter of males (27%) were victimized as children younger than 12 years old (Snyder,6
2000). In their study of victims of child sexual abuse, Hurcombe and colleagues (2019)
conducted qualitative analysis of the data collected from 12 individuals, six males and six
females, who experienced sexual abuse as children. They found that 73% of participants
abused in religious contexts reported that they were eight years old or older, compared to
56% of people abused in non-religious contexts, others were aged less than eight years old
(Hurcombe et al., 2019). In both groups, victims aged 16-17 years old constituted 3% of
the total number of participants.
Perpetrators
Considering that most male victims are abused as children, it is important to state
that in most of the cases a victim knows his perpetrator. According to the NIPSVS 2010
Summary Report, female victims of rape reported that in 51.1% of cases the perpetrator
was current or former intimate partner, 12.5% were raped by a family member, 2.5% of
cases involved a person of authority, 40.8% of perpetrators were acquaintances, and 13.8%
of rapes were committed by a complete stranger (Basil et al., 2011). The same source points
out that in cases of sexual violence other than rape such as sexual coercion, made to
penetrate, unwanted sexual contact, and non-contact unwanted sexual experiences where a
victim of a crime was female 35% of victims were abused by their current or former
intimate partner, 16.1% were perpetrated by a family member, 7.9% by a person of
authority, 42.1% by an acquaintance, and 44.8% by a stranger (Basil et al., 2011).
The NIPSVS report on male victims of rape shows that 52.4% of responders were
raped by acquaintances and 15.1% by strangers (Basil et al., 2011). In cases of other sexual
violence against males 36.0% of the respondents were perpetrated by current or former
intimate partner, 6.2% by a family member, 7.5% by a person of authority, 50.6% by an7
acquaintance, and 31.1% by a stranger (Basil et al., 2011). The information on prevalence
of offenders who are known to a victim prior to offence is supported throughout the existing
literature (Hohendorf et al., 2017; Lambie & Johnston, 2016; OʼLeary & Gould, 2010;
Terry, 2013). The Bureau of Justice statistics in their 2000 report, also stated that only
14.7% of female victims, and 7.3% of male victims of sexual assault were abused by a
stranger (Snyder, 2000). Familiarity with the perpetrator in many cases prevents a victim
from reporting sexual abuse and assault to authorities.
Myths Surrounding Sexual Abuse of Males
While there is a similarity between male and female victims of sexual assault and
abuse in terms of familiarity with perpetrator, there is a number of differences in
prevalence, dynamics, consequences, and coping mechanisms related to the victim’s
gender. For many years, the sexual assault and abuse was seen and studied based on the
male perpetrator, female victim paradigm resulting in misconceptions about male
victimization (Davies & Rogers, 2006; Leal, 2014; Stemple & Meyer, 2014). Thus, the
knowledge about female victims of sexual abuse is more extensive than that about male
victims. Nevertheless, there is a recent recognition of male victimization and more
attention has been given to this issue. What is known so far, is that there is no typical profile
of a victim of sexual abuse; most of incidents occur indoors, predominantly in residential
settings; sexual abuse of males is hugely underreported, only 10% of incidents are reported
to authorities (Basil et al., 2011; Ullman, 2002; Ullman et al., 2010).
Underreporting leads to some level of scientific ignorance surrounding sexual
assault and abuse of males and results in the development of myths about such assaults.
These myths in return become one of the important and impactful factors that diminish8
reporting sexual abuse. In their introduction to the literature on the sexual assault of males,
Coxell and King (2010), challenged some myths concerning survivors, perpetrators, and
plausibility of sexual abuse of men. One of such myths is that the sexual arousal of the
victim is a sign of consent on behalf of survivor. Unfortunately for the victims of sexual
abuse, this belief was shared even by lawyers (Coxell & King, 2010). However, this myth
does not find its support in scientific literature reviewed by Coxell and King. There is
evidence that any emotional response including anxiety, fear, anger, pain can lead to
involuntary erection and ejaculation (Bullock & Beckson, 2011; Coxell & King, 2010).
The victims of sexual assault who experienced erection and/or ejaculation during sexual
abuse can be distressed by this and think that something “isn’t right” with them (Davies et
al., 2010; Lowe & Balfur, 2015).
Another impactful myth about sexual abuse of males is that a male who abuses
other males must be gay (Burt & Demello, 2003; Coxell & King, 2010). The inference that
the sexual act between two persons of the same sex is a homosexual act is false and has
been disproved. The extant literature suggests that many male perpetrators assault their
victims to dominate them, to display power rather than for sexual gratification
(Buchhandler-Raphael, 2010; Coxell & King, 2010; Javaid, 2016; Reynaert, 2015). The
same myth exists about male victims of sexual assault. While it is evident that some of the
victims of sexual abuse are gay, many of them are heterosexual individuals who as a result
of being perpetrated by the other male often have issues with coming in terms with their
sexuality. Many of such victims start questioning themselves suggesting that they might
have been giving off “gay signals” which resulted in their victimization (Burt & Demello,
2003; Coxell & King, 2010; Javaid, 2016).9
Finally, there is a belief that a male cannot be forced into sex against his will. The
widespread opinion that men must be capable of defending themselves finds no support in
the existing literature (Coxell & King, 2010; Davies et al., 2012; Davies & Rogers, 2006).
The actual state of affairs for men who have experienced sexual abuse is quite the opposite.
Many of subjects of various qualitative studies admitted feeling helpless and passive during
their assaults (Burt & Demello, 2003; Coxell & King, 2010).
Dynamics of Sexual Abuse of Boys
The sense of helplessness might be intensified by the fact that very often the
perpetrator of the crime is known by the victim and holds a supreme position in relation to
the victim. To have a deeper understanding of how prevalence, familiarity with a
perpetrator, and reporting issues interrelated, it is important to examine the nature of the
abuse itself. A study conducted in Brazil by Hohendorff et al. (2017), presented the
dynamics of sexual violence against boys. The study contributes a great deal to
understanding of the dynamics of sexual crimes against young males aged between 6 and
18 years and systemic and social issues related to visibility of sexual violence and
maltreatment of victims of such crimes. Though having numerous limitations such as
convenience sampling, sample size, and insufficient length of interviews, the authors were
able to identify and describe in great detail six themes that represented various stages in
the dynamics of sexual abuse: (1) Preparation, (2) Episodes, (3) Silencing, (4) Narrative,
(5) Repression, and (6) Overcoming (Hohendorff et al., 2017).
Preparation is the first stage in the dynamics of sexual abuse and encompasses all
data related to facilitators of sexual abuse and strategies used by offenders to get access to
victims. Data collected on this stage of the abuse once again revealed that the abuser in10
most cases was known to the victim prior to the offence (Crosson-Tower, 2015; Sgroi et
al., 1982; Spiegel, 2003). The strategies used by offenders included playing games,
bargaining, and the abuse of power imbalance (Crosson-Tower, 2015; Hohendorff et al.,
2017; Sgroi et al., 1982; Spiegel, 2003). Episodes is the second stage of the dynamics and
describes the type and frequency of sexual abuse. During this stage, perpetrators often used
physical force and/or victims’ vulnerability to force boys into sexual contact (Hohendorff
et al., 2017). The third stage is silencing, and it refers to the factors that contribute to
keeping an offence a secret. The understanding of this stage is crucially important since it
is known that sexual abuse is underreported, especially in cases of the abuse against males,
and usually disclosed in adulthood (Easton et al., 2014; Sorsoli et al., 2008). Hohendorff
et al. (2017) found that on a personal level, victims were afraid to disclose the abuse, while
practitioners mentioned the fact that victims did not see interactions with a perpetrator of
the abuse. Age of the victim also contributed to the secrecy: older victims found it more
difficult to disclose). Other factors that affected disclosure included disbelief by others,
fear of family punishment, blame on the victim, fear of retaliation by the abuser, and family
secret (Easton et al., 2014; Hohendorff et al., 2017; Holmes & Slap, 1998; Sorsoli et al.,
2008).
The fourth stage of dynamics of sexual abuse against boys is narrative. This stage
refers to the end of abuse due to either disclosure or discovery of the abuse. Disclosure
during this stage of dynamics in one of the episodes happened after the victim realized
what was happening to him; another victim disclosed the abuse after his older sister, who
have been a victim as well, disclosed her victimization. Family reactions and victim’s
feelings were important too. Some of the victims felt courage to disclose the abuse to their11
families, while others were stressed and angry and never disclosed the abuse (Hohendorff
et al., 2017).
The next stage of dynamics of sexual abuse is repression, which mainly refers to a
denial of the sexual abuse by the perpetrator, the victim’s family and even by the victims
themselves. This stage includes avoidance of discussions about the incident by the victim
and the victim’s family, presence of perpetrator, attempts “to lock away” bad memories,
low visibility of such incidents, stigmatization, and blaming the victim. (Hohendorff et al.,
2017). As it is evident those themes repeat themselves in findings of many studies. Social
view of male sexual victimization and stereotypes such as “he must be gay,” “could have
protected himself,” “ no way a boy or a man can be a victim of sexual assault,” and an
abused-abuser paradigm enormously affect reporting rates, mental health of the victim, and
many other aspects of male victimization through stigma.
The last stage of the dynamics of sexual abuse is overcoming. This stage
incorporates protection and recovery of the victims as well as the role of the system. Some
of the coping mechanisms described by the abused boys included the distance from the
offender, family support, reduction of the stress after talking to an interviewer, medical
care, examination, and psychological intervention, which was perceived by some of the
victims as “really cool” (Hohendorff et al., 2017; OʼLeary & Gould, 2010).
The role of the system includes several negative subtopics such as difficulties
navigating the justice system, flawed perceptions of the abuse, complicated processes, and
discrimination of the victims demonstrated by the representatives of the system. One of the
cases included a judge who directly asked a victim: “Okay, but you went there because you
wanted to, right?” (Hohendorff et al., 2017). In addition, some of the victims admitted that12
they had to face the stereotype that since they have been abused, now they are at higher
risk of becoming an abuser. Researchers deem such systemic flaws as one of the barriers
to reporting sexual assaults and abuse to authorities. Additionally, they are not of any help
for an individual who has been abused and cause a lot of psychological distress.
Sexual Abuse in Religious Communities
It is well established that sexual victimization results in wide variety of mental
health, social, sexual, and behavioral issues (Mullen et al., 1996; Pérez-Fuentes et al., 2013;
Richter et al., 2018; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000). It is possible that in order to prevent or
avoid these negative outcomes religious communities have established moral standards that
govern sexual behavior of community members (Farmer et al., 2009; Longest & Uecker,
2018). Additionally, the existing literature suggests that religious individuals are less
impulsive and participate in crimes less frequently (McCullough & Willoughby, 2009;
Pirutinsky, 2014). Nevertheless, other sources support the fact that the prevalence of sexual
abuse in religious communities has the same rate with those in secular groups (Doxey et
al., 1997; Elliott, 1994; Spröber et al., 2014). Yet, boys with religious background are 3.3
times more likely to be abused than their secular counterparts (Schein et al., 2000).
While most of the existing literature on sexual abuse of children within religious
institutions discusses the problem within the scope of Catholic Church, Morrison (2005)
posits that child sexual abuse is a phenomenon that occurs within a large spectrum of
religious institutions. Furthermore, in his book, Jenkins (2001) suggests that there are
probably thousands of children who were sexually abused since the 1980s. Numerous
studies suggest that child sexual abuse take place in other religious groups such as
Buddhists, Hindus, Baptists, Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, Protestants, Jews, and13
Muslims (Bryant & Ekstrand, 2004; Jenkins, 2003; Spröber et al., 2014; Terry, 2011).
While the information about prevalence and nature of child sexual abuse in religious
communities remains scarce, with an exception of Catholic Church, it is known that males
in religious communities are as vulnerable as females; in Jewish communities males are
3.3 times more likely to be sexually assaulted than their secular counterparts while females
are less likely to be victimized (Al-Fayez et al., 2012; Holt & Massey, 2013; Schein et al.,
2000). The high rates of boys’ victimization in Jewish communities can be explained by
somewhat easy access of perpetrators to victims due to religious gender segregation.
Ultra-Orthodox Jewish Community
Ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) society is a Jewish minority group that lives strictly by the
Jewish Law (Halacha). Ultra-Orthodox Jews (Haredim) believe that Halacha is given by
G-d1, and that it cannot be changed (Charnyi, 2009). The core principles of Haredim
include but are not limited to understanding and accepting the fact that the Written Torah
(Bible)2 was given to Moses by G-d on mountain Sinai; passing the knowledge given in
Torah to the subsequent generations without changing the story; strictly following Torah
Sheba’al Peh (Oral Law)3 in addition to the Written Torah (Charnyi, 2009; Finnegan, 1970;
Schnall, 2006). These laws regulate day-to-day Jewish lives in every step including strict
dietary laws (Kashrut), home keeping (Shalom Bayit), and sexual behavior.
1
Since the Name of G-d written in full is a holy object in Judaism. The author replaces full spelling of the
Name with “G-d” to avoid possible erasure or defacement of the Name.
2
Perceived as the “given” wisdom and will of G-d transcribed by Moses. It is known as the Five Books of
Moses and contained within Torah Scroll.
3
Incorporates the traditions prescribed by Written Torah as well as interpretations and rules developed by
sages from different generations. On a very simplified level can be understood as a Rabbinical expansion
on and clarification of Written Torah. Both Written and Oral Torah regarded by Ultra-Orthodox Jews with
the same level of respect14
Sexual Regulations in Judaism
As with other religions, Judaism has sexual behavior regulations that outlaw certain
sexual acts. Many of them are listed in the chapter 18 of the Book of Leviticus and have a
specific name in Hebrew: ( עריותarayot) (Eisenberg, 2015). Arayot include incestuous
relationships, anal intercourse between two males, bestiality, and intercourse with a woman
who is on her period (Knohl, 2008). While the Written Torah does not explicitly prohibit
sexual relationships with children, there are numerous places in the Torah from where such
an inference can be made. For example, Deuteronomy 22:25 (ArtScroll Series, Stone
Edition) says, “But if it is in the field that the man will find the betrothed girl, and the man
will seize her and lie with her, only the man who lies with her shall die,” which is a
prohibition of rape. Exodus 22:15 (ArtScroll Series, Stone Edition) prohibits seduction by
stating “If a man shall seduce a virgin who was not betrothed and lie with her, he shall
provide her with a marriage contract as his wife.” Deuteronomy 23:18 (ArtScroll Series,
Stone Edition) prohibits any extramarital sexual activities, including the consensual ones.
Additionally, in Leviticus 19:16 (ArtScroll Series, Stone Edition) there is a prohibition on
disregarding someone who is in danger, and while it does not mention sexual abuse
explicitly, it can be inferred that failing to report such an incident when it is known can be
considered a sin.
Barriers to Reporting Sexual Abuse in Jewish Communities
Yet, sexual abuse of children in Jewish Ultra-Orthodox communities remains
highly underreported due to strict regulations, isolation, and silencing (Stadler, 2008;
Zalcberg & Zalcberg, 2012). To better understand the barriers that can be faced by male
survivors of sexual abuse in Jewish communities, there is a need to review and explain15
several terms and concepts in Ultra-Orthodox Judaism. One of the major controllers of
reporting of any crimes is a concept of ( מסירהMesirah). Mesirah if translated literally,
means “giving over.” The real-life application of this concept prohibits giving over a
Jewish criminal to the non-Jewish legal system. A derived noun, Moser, describes a person
who repeatedly violated the law of Mesirah. As it is stated in Shulchan Aruch4, it is
permissible to kill a Moser (Karo & Kadushin, 1917). According to Rabbi Michael Broyde
(2002, p.3), one of the prominent modern Rabbinic scholars, summarizing Halachical
prohibition, explains:
Jewish law discusses three different problems: informing a bandit that a person has
money or some other item of value; informing an abusive government of the same
and informing the government that someone has violated its laws. As is obvious to
anyone with even a vague familiarity with the flow of Jewish history, Jews have
generally lived in situations where government was unjust (or unjust towards Jews)
or bandits formed the basis for government, and telling the abusive government that
a Jew had money or that a Jew had broken the law was a dangerous act. Indeed, this
conduct clearly, readily and directly caused people to have their money taken,
themselves beaten or tortured and sometimes simply murdered. The Talmudic
Sages had no choice but to enact rabbinic decrees prohibiting such informing.
The concept of Mesirah, if taken too literally, leads to simply not reporting any
Jewish criminal to non-Jewish authorities. Thus, it can be very difficult for a religiously
observant Ultra-Orthodox Jewish individual to go ahead and report any crime committed
against him or herself.
4
Authored by Yosef Karo and published in Venice in 1563, Shulchan Aruch with its commentaries
represents the most widely accepted description of Halacha (Jewish Law) and its application in Jewish life.16
The next important concept is a concept of Lashon Hara, which literally means
“evil tongue.” Lashon Hara is a Halachic term that is used to describe a defamatory speech
(Diamond, 2006; Komisar, 2011; Lewis, 2015). According to Komisar (2011), “The
Talmud (Arachin 15b) states that each act of lashon hará does irreparable harm to three
people: the victim of the gossip, the person who listened to it, and the perpetrator
him/herself”(p. 1). While it is not explained how exactly it harms these three people, it is
still used to prevent victims of crime from reporting their perpetrators to avoid a sin of
defamation. Sexual abuse allegations are most definitely a source of defamation, whether
the abuse took place or not.
Another impactful concept is Hillul Hashem, or Desecrating G-d’s Name. This
complex concept can be evoked by the trial if a Jewish abuser will become known publicly.
That sort of embarrassment considered to be Hillul Hashem since it might promote bad
views of the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish Community as a whole. Discussing issues in relation
to Hillul Hashem and sexual abuse in Jewish communities, Brofsky (2017) says: “In
addition to the obvious injustice cased to the survivors, and to others who may fall victim
to abuse due to communal silence, this phenomenon causes many to lose trust in the
community, its leadership, and ultimately in G[-]d”(p. 74).
There is also a concept of Tzniyut, or personal modesty. This concept manifested
itself in almost every aspect of Ultra-Orthodox Jewish lives. Clothing, education, speech,
behavior, manners, sexual activities, and views on sexuality: everything is dictated by
Tzniyut. Boys and girls study in gender separated schools. Men and women pray in
synagogues on different sides of divider in . Regarding sexuality, pre-marital and extra-
marital sexual interactions are considered to be sinful activities. Additionally, there is no17
sexual education for unmarried men and women (Shalev et al., 2013). As a result of such
regulations, Jewish children do not know anything about sexual abuse, and even if they did
it would be highly complicated if not impossible to discuss such matters with their parents.
Having all these concepts in place, the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish community has its
own mechanism of addressing crimes committed by community members. Beit Din is a
Jewish religious court that “handles all areas of Jewish law, including questions of
marriage, divorce, and conversion” (Law, 2018). While Beit Din has seemingly important
place in settling business, marriage, and divorce matters amongst Jewish people, its role in
cases such as sexual abuse of children is somewhat questionable. This stems from the fact
that Rabbis, who are also judges, strictly rely on Halacha in these matters, and as it can be
understood from the previously stated facts, Halacha gives little to no support to survivors
of child sexual abuse. Rather it creates a great deal of obstacles that prevent victims from
reporting the abuse. One might argue that it is impossible to adjudicate the case, if the crime
is not explicitly described by the law, which is the case of child sexual abuse and Halacha.
In addition to all the reporting issues that might arise due to cultural views and
Halachic regulations, it is noteworthy to state that Ultra-Orthodox Jews for the most part
speak only Yiddish. According to the Modern Language Association (2015), in the year of
2000, the majority of residents of Borough Park area in Brooklyn, NY, 11219 spoke
Yiddish. Out of 58,881 respondents who were speaking 34 languages in total, 19,925 spoke
Yiddish as their first language. Additionally, 3,854 persons spoke Hebrew. That can cause
a language barrier for reporting crimes to civil, primarily English-speaking authorities. The
problem of language barrier and crime reporting discussed widely in the existing literature
(Cullota, 2005; Fathi, 2013; Sable et al., 2006; Shah et al., 2007; Vidales, 2010).18
While there are no empirical studies on reporting patterns of sexually abused males
in Ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities conducted in the United States, the existing
literature suggests that the phenomenon of sexual abuse of boys is as prevalent in Jewish
community as it is in other religious and secular groups (Yehuda et al., 2007). Additionally,
there is some evidence gleaned from religious texts, that reporting such incidents can be if
not impossible, then very complicated. Even more so would be seeking for justice inside
of the community itself since the religious authorities heavily rely on the religious law that
does not even have a definition of child sexual abuse.
Methodology
Participants
The sample for this study was comprised of five male survivors of sexual assault
and abuse who are Jewish and share Ultra-Orthodox Jewish background and upbringing
recruited in New York City. To be recruited for this study, prospective participants must
have been 18 years old or older, raised in Ultra-Orthodox religious Jewish community,
and had a history of sexual assault or abuse while lived in their community prior to the
age of 18. Another requirement condition was related to the abusers of participants. The
abusers must have been Jewish males with the religious Ultra-Orthodox Jewish
background. Participants’ pseudonyms, age at the time of the abuse, religious group they
belonged to, and abusers’ position in the community are presented in Table 1. All
participants of this study grew up in Jewish religious Ultra-Orthodox communities. Age
range of the participants at the moment of the interview was 23-45 years old. Three men
identified themselves as straight and two as gay. Four out of five men left the Ultra-
Orthodox community, while one participant remains a member of it.19
Table 1
Participants’ background information
Name Age Hasidic sect Age range of abuse Abuser(s)
Dov 23 Satmar 10-12 Community member,
summer camp personnel
Yaakov 37 Satmar 8-12 Yeshiva teachers
Menashe 30 Chabad 6-10 Extended family member
Lubavitcher
Sam 45 Skver 11-12 Yeshiva teacher
Ezra 45 Chabad 13 Community member
Lubavitcher
Note. Participants real names were replaced with pseudonyms to maintain their confidentiality.
The range of sexual abuse varied from sexual harassment (physical touching,
fondling) to completed rape. The exclusive focus on Ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities
is explained by high levels of seclusion of community members from the mainstream
society and the strict adherence to Halacha which dictates determined rules regarding
body, sexuality, and sexual life. Participant who were ba’al teshuvah (those who were not
raised Ultra-Orthodox, but later became observant members of the community) were
excluded from the study since they have a set of different religious regulations and codes
of behavior. Converts into Judaism were excluded for the same reason. The minimum age
for participation in the study was 18 years old and older. To protect participants’
confidentiality their real names were not recorded and were replaced with pseudonyms.
In order to be eligible to partake in the current study, potential participants required to
give consent. Due to confidentiality concerns, the consent to be a part of this study was
obtained orally.
Sampling
Five participants were selected using convenience sampling strategy in New York
City. While convenience sampling imposes numerous challenges for generalization of the20
study since the sample is not representative of the entire population, it allowed for
obtaining information about general trends in reporting patterns of sexually abused males
who were willing to participate (Given & Gale Group, 2008; Johnston & Christensen,
2017). The small size of the sample is explained by unwillingness of people to speak
about highly traumatic incidents as well as their fear of being exposed and stigmatized
based on their experiences. The subject of sexual abuse is very sensitive and complex,
thus recruiting of participants presented a challenge, especially recruiting from the given
population due to the high levels of seclusion of Ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities.
The initial contact with potential participants was established through an activist, who is
working on exposing the cases of sexual abuse of boys by Ultra-Orthodox religious
authorities to secular law enforcement agencies and authorities. The first contact with the
above-mentioned person was established through Facebook via adding them to the
researcher’s friends list. They assisted the author with the recruitment of potential
participants. This qualitative study will consequently be used for generation of hypothesis
which consequently will be tested with the larger sample size.
Study design
This study uses a qualitative approach, collecting information about the world as
perceived by the participant, thus allowing for deeper insight into the participants’
experiences (Patton, 2014). The exploratory type of research is used due to the recency of
this field of inquiry and it is important to collect initial information about sexual assault
and abuse of males in Ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities, understand the magnitude
and extent of the problem, as well as examine the feasibility of future more extensive
studies on the matter. This preliminary study uses in-depth interview as the best21
instrument to allow the participants to describe their experience and identify concepts that
are of the crucial importance in relation to the reporting decision-making process (see
Appendix 1 for instrument). The instrument was developed in accordance with four-
phase process of Interview Protocol Refinement (Castillo-Montoya, 2016). Furthermore,
it is held that in-depth interviews provide an opportunity for the efficient interaction
between the researcher and the participants, resulting in a very detailed examination of
the participants’ experiences, thoughts, opinions, perceptions and views about a specific
research matter(s) under inquiry (Esch & Esch, 2013; Malinowski, 1932; Miller and
Crabtree, 2005; Warren, 2002).
Data Collection
Using the semi-structured in-depth interviews comprised majorly of the open-
ended questions, the participants were asked to describe their background, including
religious life, education, family, communal life. The interview questions then slowly
transitioned to questions about the history of abuse, perpetrators, and reporting. The place
for the interview was discussed beforehand and chosen based on the participants’
preference. This allowed participants to feel more comfortable and secure. The
participants were notified that if they did not feel comfortable answering certain
questions they could refuse, as well as they were free to withdraw from the study at any
point in time. Additionally, there was contact information of hotlines for survivors of
sexual abuse, people in distress, and people with suicidal inclinations available. Two out
of five interviews were audio-recorded and later transcribed to improve the accuracy of
the information obtained throughout the interview. Transcriptions were compared to the
recordings to ensure its accuracy. The other three participants refused to be recorded, thus22
the information obtained from them was written down manually. Notetaking resulted in
slightly longer interviews.
In order to protect participants’ confidentiality, the author did not ask participant
for their legal names. Instead, all participants were addressed using pseudonyms. The
confidentiality of the participants of this study was maintained in accordance with the
ethical guidelines from the Institutional Research Board via following mechanisms: 1)
Data collected throughout research procedures was securely stored in a locked cabinet in
the office of the principal investigator's advisor's office; 2) Digital data, such as voice
recordings, were securely stored on the encrypted hard drive (HDD) which only could be
used with the credentials of the principal investigator (login and password); 3) No
personal identifiers were used in writing out the results of the research, instead
pseudonyms were used as references to the participants; 4) Contact information such as
emails and phone numbers was destroyed immediately after the interview process was
completed; 5) Voice recordings and handwritten notes did not have participants'
identifiers in order to ensure that the participants are not explicitly connected to the
research topic.
Data Analysis
In attempt to identify motives, commonalities, and possible variables for future
research, five interviews were analyzed for content. The data collected through
audiotaping were transcribed for the analysis. The transcriptions were compared against
audiotapes to ensure that there were no mistakes made during the transcription process.
The revision and analysis of transcription was conducted based on two criteria: based on
questions and based on themes. Grounded theory approach was used to identify common23
motives as well as unique narratives. Grounded theory uses inductive reasoning and starts
with questions and data collection rather than hypothetico-deductive model typically used
in quantitative studies (Charmaz, 2004; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Thus, certain interview
questions were constructed to obtain very specific information. For example, some of
them were structured using words such as “reporting,” “secret,” “believe,” “prohibited,”
“trust,” “fear,” “share,” and other words that could possibly illicit thoughts and memories
of the participants in relation to reporting the incident(s) of abuse. It was expected that
some of the questions could remain unanswered by some participants due to
unwillingness or recollection issues, yet all the participants responded to each interview
question. Analysis based on questions provided very detailed and specific information
about personal experiences of the participants.
The analysis by theme revealed general commonalities in experiences, thoughts,
and perceptions of the matter of inquiry. The researcher was looking for themes that were
discussed by all, or by most participants regardless of the questions asked by the
researcher. The thematic analysis was conducted in accordance with Braun and Clarke
(2012) instructions. Each interview was analyzed in following six phases: 1) reading and
rereading textual materials aiming to make materials as familiar as it was possible.
Transcripts were compared against the voice recordings to ensure their correctness; 2) the
initial codes were generated for the variety of similar concepts presented by the
participants; 3) the initial codes were revised in order to establish their fitness for the
categories; 4) the analysis was refined to make sure that the themes emerged were not
overlapping, had meaning and enough data to support them; 5) the themes were defined
and listed with the supporting examples from the interviews; 6) the report was produced.24
This strategy was used to reveal information that is not known yet, or is known
but the knowledge remains scarce, which is true about sexual abuse of males and their
reporting patterns. The themes for analysis were not predetermined and were identified
based on the information provided by the participants throughout their interviews. The
following themes and sub-themes were identified as being associated with disclosure:
lack of trust in the criminal justice system, family trust or the lack of thereof, communal
and family pressure and silencing, family support, lack of legal education, fear of
punishment, religious constrains, lack of sex education, language barrier, shame.
Throughout the data analysis efforts were made to ensure that there were no overlapping
factors, however, community and family were found to impact reporting patterns via
similar mechanisms.
Maintaining Trustworthiness of the Analysis
When evaluating trustworthiness of qualitative research analysis there are four
major components to be considered: credibility, transferability, dependability, and
confirmability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Credibility must be ensured by avoiding biases
while interpreting the information obtained through interviews. Some of these biases
might include personal experiences, thoughts, or feelings of the researchers. To ensure
credibility of this study, the researcher uses the verbatim information provided by the
participants. Quotes of original utterances are used throughout the study report.
The second method used to increase credibility is avoiding generalization of the
information obtained from only one or two participants. Information that was not
supported by at least four out of five participants was not considered as a theme and is
not presented in this report.25
The generalizability, or external validity is typically hard to ensure. This is
specifically true about preliminary exploratory studies with small samples, where the
sample was collected using convenience sampling technique. Yet, this study has a
potential of replicating it with the larger sample size and using different more
generalizable approaches, e.g., mixed methods study.
To satisfy the dependability requirement of inquiry, external audit was conducted
by an outside researcher. All evaluations and conclusions were inspected to establish
whether they are supported by the actual data and do not contradict the information
collected from the participants. To ensure confirmability of the analysis an audit trail was
used to write out in great detail the process of collection, analysis and interpretation of
the obtained information and emerged themes.
Results
This section discusses the results of the analysis of the factors that according to
the participants either promoted or prevented disclosure and reporting of sexual abuse.
The major themes that were identified as influencing reporting decisions of the
participants were education, religion, community, family, and individual factors. These
themes were spoken about by all interviewees. Themes were broken down in sub-themes
that were identified and are represented in Table 2. The factors discussed by men in this
study might impact reporting decisions of those from different religious and secular
communities and might not be unique for Ultra-Orthodox Jewish survivors. However,
they were claimed by the participants as highly influential on their disclosure and
reporting decisions. None of the five participants reported sexual abuse to legal
authorities immediately or soon after it happened to them.26
Table 2
Themes and sub-themes discussed by the participants
Theme Sub-Theme Example
Education Language barrier “I call 911 and then what?” (Sam)
“At 12 I don't think I speak [English]” (Dov)
Lack of sexual education “There was never anything related to sex, sexuality, um,
promiscuity, pornography, anything like that” (Sam)
“There was no discussion about a consent” (Yaakov)
“I thought puberty was some kind of illness. Honestly, I was
afraid to tell my parents that I have this illness because, well, I
figured it out by touching something I'm not supposed to” (Dov)
Education Lack or misleading legal “I had no idea about the police, for example, I had no idea that I
education could go to law enforcement” (Yaakov)
“It was taught that calling the police if something happens is the
worst thing in the world to do” (Sam)
“So, you feel that sometimes you shouldn't call the police and
deal with problem” (Ezra)
Religion Halacha and its “If the word gets out that a Hasidic Jew raped someone that was
regulations shaming the name of G[-]d, it's called Hillul Hashem. So, we
cannot do anything that will shame the name of G[-]d” (Dov)
“We were always told that one of the worst things that you can do
to another Jew or in general, is basically tell on another Jew to the
authorities” (Dov)
Community Control over the “The community has a tight, um, information flow control” (Dov)
information
Cover up and protection “When somebody does go to trial, there's, you know, the
of offenders community would raise money for their lawyers and show so
much support” (Ezra)
“There've been a lot of documented cases of cover ups, payoffs,
payouts” (Yaakov)
Pressure on the survivors “If somebody tries to stand up against sexual assault, they get out
and their families from the community pretty quickly” (Dov)
“Threats of out… of outing people or families from the
community” (Sam)
Abuser’s position in the “There's no way this rabbi or teacher could've done it would've
community done that” (Dov)
Lack of support and “There are no services, no therapists in the community”
services (Menashe)
Family Distrust to children “So, any kid that says something that doesn't match with their
word must be lying” (Yaakov)
“I mean, I, I did try, I did try to talk to people and it was basically
a joke” (Dov)
“Are you sure that what you say happened, is what actually
happened?” (Dov)
Fear of punishment “My teacher physically abused me for talking about it, I was not
sure if won’t get the same reaction from my parents” (Yaakov)
Distrust in parents “There was no one I really trusted, including my parents. There
was not a single person in the world” (Dov)
Personal Self-blame “I was told, and I felt that something was wrong with me, thus it
was my fault”
Shame “I was very ashamed, and it felt like uh… I did something wrong”
(Menashe)You can also read
